Is this Art? Or sophisticated decorating?

Is this Art? Or sophisticated decorating?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiraz
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d9/Statue_of_Ferdowsi_and_Shahname_in_Delfan.jpg
meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_literature_in_Western_culture
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Interior decorating is an art.

How is the Nasir al-Mulk Mosque in Shiraz, Iran not art? Shiraz, Iran contains monuments important to both Pre-Islamic and Post-Islamic Persian tradition: such as Palace of Ardashir (most important imo), Sassanid Palace in Sarvestan, Shapur Cave, Tomb of Cyrus, Persepolis' ruins, Bishapur, Saadi Shirazi's Tomb, Tomb of Hafez, Nasir ol Molk Mosque, and SOOO much more.

Shiraz, Iran is literally the most important destination in Iran:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiraz

If you don't like Islam, that's fine, but Shiraz is proof Iran still has a direct connection to its Pre-Islamic past. Also, Hafez and Saadi are important to our heritage, and they were more like liberal Sufis.

>that
>sophisticated

Fucking swimming pool tiling is more sophisticated.

Since muslim architecture has to rely solely on geometry for beauty and contains no human imagery or statuary their temples come off soulless and empty. They're pretty but never reach the sublime.

Aren't decorations art?

What?

There are tons of statues in Shiraz, Iran, mostly of poets and Pre-Islamic figures.

They kind of suck at geometrical art as well though.

Also, historical wax figures are actually the most popular in Shiraz, Iran. We tend to prefer wax figures for how they transport people into the past.

It's supposed to be a place of worship, not a palace. Decorations are good, but they're only secondary to the function of a mosque.

But if you wanna make your churches into art exhibits, that's fine, I guess

what if I want to worship a saint or mother mary?

>art should be reserved only for rich fucks and hidden away from the people

Yeah no you're a cunt. And your palaces suck ass too.

Idolatry

Hey, don't diss the most important city for our Persian heritage. Also, we have a lot of statues of Pre- and Post-Islamic figures, like I've said. We're called pagans by the Gulf Arabs for a reason -- we're a bit more liberal in how we portray saints.

kek

Agreed 100%

If you are gonna build something it should be pretty.

>art should be reserved only for rich fucks and hidden away from the people

What? You missed my point entirely

>And your palaces suck ass too.

>implying they aren't some of the most comfiest places ever

looks fucking shit

also, it doesn't even look like a person, how the fuck am I supposed to worship that?

t. kuffar

Looks like a giant wart growing out of the ceiling

This is literally how American rednecks decorate our trailer homes. Floral patterns and geometric rugs.

>Americans copying cultures and ruining them

What's new

I believe this is Iran's best statue.

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d9/Statue_of_Ferdowsi_and_Shahname_in_Delfan.jpg

Mud people are emotional and aesthetic cripples compared to Europeans.

Christianity wouldn't even exist if it weren't for Zoroastrian influence.

why can't it be both?

How are they emotional cripples? Also, aesthetics is by definition based on the tastes of a person. People who are into Persian, Moorish and Turkic aesthetics are the ones who would visit Islamic architectural works.

Also, there's no need to be so pompous. As an olive branch, my favorite Catholic cathedral is Saint Gatien's Cathedral

>somebody posts art or buildings from other cultures
>hurrr nice try but muh western art is much better because durrr
>I literally cant understand cultures are different and their art and architecture serve different purposes

Literally why is everyone on Veeky Forums so obsessed with peoples being superior or inferior to others.

is that supposed to be impressive?

My ancestors built far better churches than that shit

We're simply better. Fact.

I can't tell if he's trying to say our Pre-Islamic past was better than our Post-Islamic one.

Well, he does kind of have a point. In Pre-Islamic times, Iranians weren't afraid to put statues of important figures in places of worship, perhaps their fire temples. I think a lot of our mosques, mausoleums, etc. would be enhanced if we put cool statues in them -- I agree with that.

Christians are not adverse to henotheism whereas Muslims are -- this is the reason why they're fine with statues of Mary and such. I agree with him that statues like that enhance the experience, but it does not mean we are artistically crippled and such. We have statues of our famous poets... but I do think a statue of Zoroaster in a place of worship would be badass.

Naqsh-e Jahan Square in Isfahan, Iran*.
It's good to give context when posting this stuff. It's beautiful, but I do think statues of our mystics in glorious positions would make it better. For example, a statue of Mansur-al Hillaj being led by angels to heaven or something like that.

>Literally why is everyone on Veeky Forums so obsessed with peoples being superior or inferior to others.

Because they are inferior individuals, and thus have a high stake in promoting the superiority of whatever groups they can somehow associate themselves with, no matter how tenuously.

White culture is always better

This.

I mean who invented architecture in the first place?

Oh yeah, that's right, we did.

why wouldn't it be art?
though Muslims were limited by their ban on human figures, Id argue their sense of aesthetics was far advanced of Europe for a long time, not to mention their taste for more abstract art, which Europe didn't really develop until MUCH latter.
I don't agree with while especially latter Christian art became absolutely fantastic in its glorification of the divine, discounting the aesthetic personal feel of a well designed mosque is unwarranted.
I've had the pleasure of visiting some very beautiful ones in morocco and the entire design of the place is so perfectly designed to put you at ease and instill a sense of heavenly beauty in its perfection.

now once the west hit the Renaissance it shot forward artistically but its not as if Islamic art is terrible or lacking.

Persians are White.

>Muslims think autistic doodling is art.

That shit is tacky as fuck. It's like how a nouveau riche Slav would decorate his mansion

You have to go back.

If there is one common theme amongst all religious art, it's fractals. Fractals are the purest expression of art.

Maybe 1000 years ago. Not anymore.

A statue of Mansur-al Hallaj being led by angels to heaven would be amazing.

Fractals are doodles you autist.

>A statue of Mansur-al Hallaj

Fucking KEK

Now Euros want to see fucking MUSLIMS being lead to heaven

YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS SHIT UP!!

>Maybe 1000 years ago. Not anymore.
We never mixed with the Arabs much. We mixed with the people of Transcaucasia a lot because the Mongol invasions significantly reduced our numbers. We're still White. Most people are mixed. Even Europeans are a mix of Proto-Indo-Europeans of Southern Russia, dark-skinned mesolithic hunters, and neolithic Anatolian farmers.

Mansur-al Hallaj was a Sufi killed by his own people. He was like Rumi, Attar, Hafez, or Omar Khayyam in mentality. Most Orthodox Muslims do not consider Sufis as being technically Muslim.

pic related, I'd argue Muslim's tend to focus more on the human aspects and design their temples with man's comfort/to aid meditation rather than as a house of God which Christians favour in their glory and scale.

Many mosques tend to have reflection pools, gardens, long walking paths, shrines for people to pray or contemplate, incense or lots of flowers to keep the space aromatic, washing stations for people to keep themselves clean and smelling good while in the mosque, and other similar human touches.

the West was sorely lacking I'd argue until Cluniac art.

as for the Abstract, I believe it better represents the concept of the divine compared to human figures. Sacred geometry and fractal patterns are at the core of reality, not to mention abstraction is all about comprehending the impossible.

people today still don;t even really "get" abstract art

Go far back into your ancestry and you will find dark-skinned Mesolithic hunters, and in all honesty, most Europeans probably have a Jew or two in their ancestry.

Nowadays, yeah. But back then, geometric designs, floral aesthetics, and silk hanging were comfy af

No you're just a sandnegro. We don't want you or your cousin fucking and honor killing.

its all about presentation
Slav McMansions look awful because of the mishmash of styles and lack of coherency

Many Persians still look like their ancestors, and if it weren't for Zoroastrian influence, there would be no Christianity.

Saoshyant = Jesus
Frashokereti = Day of Judgment
Light being equivalent to good and darkness to evil = Zoroastrian origin

Practically all scholars agree with this.

Also, Sufism has no honor killing. Rumi and Saadi Shirazi did not do honor killing and condemned it.

that looks comfy af

the globe doesn't fit in that well though

and the leopard pattern sofa looks shit

You Persians should team up and un-islam your homelands. Bring back Zoroastrianism.

its from the Burj Dubai

desu I'd say Western architecture reached its peak with the synthesis of Mughal Muslim-indian and British-classical styles.

its not about superiority/inferiority since these societies have different objective and ideals as what they considered beauty

we could all agree that regardless of style, some things can be regarded as universally beautiful, though not up to our ideals. it just mean opening up to different kind of art and beauty.

muslims may think churches are beautiful, but find it degenerate since it feature paganic looking statues

the same way that a traditionalist zen japanese person might think both european and islamic art beautiful, but might find its overdone and lack zen minimalistic contemplative element

That picture is basically Byzantine architecture. The arches aren't even pointed Moorish ones but proper old-fashioned Roman ones. It's well-made but not pioneering or original in any way, just a copy of what the Romans/Byzantines were building centuries before that.

I prefer a hybrid among Zurvanism (best sect of Zoroastrianism that was persecuted), Manichaeism, Greco-Buddhism (which was big during Parthian times), and Sufism. Mainstream Zoroastrianism (called Mazdaism) was stupid.

I don't see why we can't combine the best elements of religious traditions into one.

Also, Kartir Hangirpe was as brutal as Khomeinei, and Kartir oppressed Zurvanites, Nestorian Christians, Manichees, etc. Mazdakites (another sect of Zoroastrians) were also oppressed by Khosrau I.

>Statues

get a load of this guy

It's kitsch

Jesus christ this thread is living proof that Veeky Forums was a mistake, the amount of shitposting and flat out niggardry about "MUH WEST/WHITE/ART/STYLE" is fucking embarrassing.
Honest question guys, how many spergs or autists are on this board?

>That picture is basically Byzantine architecture.
yes and Arabs adopted the best of Byzantine art.
either way Byzantium was never "the West"

>Byzantine architecture
It was probably influenced by Sassanid architecture, like Cteisphon.

If you are attempting to conflate Arab/Muslim culture with Byzantine culture you are plain wrong.

I also don't see how Byzantium isn't the West, when Western culture is literally a mix of Greco-Roman culture and Christianity, which is literally what the ERE was.

Are you one of those people who claims Cleopatra was African?

Looks like a close up of a barnacle

Neato.

You guys were awesome until you got conquered by the goatfuckers. You really should kill them all and build a new country for yourselves. Arabs are shitty at war, so you could probably mop the floor with them if you were organized and unified. You'd get along great with the rest of the white diaspora.

Read this. It is a famous article in American military circles. meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars

Also, your post claimed that Muslim aesthetics were "far advanced of Europe for a long time" and posted a picture of what is literally a copy of European aesthetics.

thats your ethnocentric opinion

It's like geopolitical realities and basic common sense don't real to you, isn't it?

Looks like some procedurally generated minecraft shit.

Practically all of the liberal elements of Islam came from us. The architecture, music, etc. came from us too.

I agree, mainstream Islam is like Aum Shinrikyo, very violent and such, but Sufism is very good. Sufis interpret verses relating to "kill the unbelievers" as meaning "love everyone unconditionally -- kill them with kindness".

People like Attar, Rumi, Sinai, Hafez, Saadi Shirazi, Omar Khayyam, etc. were liberal Sufis that would drink wine, dance with women, and so forth. Sufism is an important aspect of Persian ethos and a testament of how we took something that initially began with blood and violence and made it more liberal.

Even Westerners like Goethe, Nietzsche, Fitzgerald, Ralph Waldo Emerson, etc. enjoyed Sufi poets such as Hafez, Saadi Shirazi, and Rumi:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_literature_in_Western_culture

I heard a lot of Iranians are publicly Muslim but privately Zoroastrian. Any truth to this?

in North America there is a lot of Zoroastrian memery, a few of my mates are Persian and are the equivalent of "muh heritage" Norse pagans.

The Shahnameh is the most important text to Persian heritage. It is also important to Eastern Iranians like Tajiks.

Ferdowsi's Tomb is very important to us.

>1632–53

Islamic architecture was influenced heavily in its early stages by Persian and Byzantine elements, the latter of which was also influenced by Persian elements

≈2560BC-2550

Egyptians were white. They did all their best shit in the old kingdom and everything slowly got shittier as they interbred with the mud peoples.

Byzantine architecture is just an evolution of Classical Greek and then Roman architecture. It doesn't really have many influences from Persian architecture at all.

It's also quite inaccurate to use the term "Islamic" architecture, as that encompasses a huge part of the world comprising of many different cultures and architectural styles.

>Aesthetics
>Subjective

Wrong. Some works are objectively superior to others

Prove it.

t. Sun Tzu

Nah I heard this in reference to Iranians in Iran. Any truth to it?

Prove aesthetics are subjective.

Whaddya think of that Mr. unemployed liberal arts degree?

Semites, dude. The Semite mind is only capable of debasement and deconstruction, until all beauty and soul and passion and craftsmanship has been destroyed. Until nothing is left but geometric lines. Their "art" is pretty but unimaginative. It doesn't even inspire imagination in the viewer. It's true, it's just a well developed form of decoration by Western standards.

Why do you think Mohammed banned it? When a Semite sees Western art, they hate it and want to destroy it. The Jews did modern art. Our art schools teach there is no such thing as truth, they have destroyed the craftsmanship and cultural traditions. They turned our art market into a money laundering racket. Rap music. The Semites did this.

> thinking some meme-religion somehow was relevant to the saviours plan

Judgements on the value of art are influenced by the subject making the judgement.

How can we know what's real when our eyes are mirrors?

All I know is that I'm experiencing

Consciousness is an illusion. Your brain chemistry is no more reliable as an arbitrator of truth than the photons hitting your retina.

>conciousness is an illusion

Tell me what you mean by illusion.

>they did all their ebst shit in the old kingdom+


False

Your gender identity is false

Nothing is real, everything is arbitrary, none of it matters, therefore democracy and liberalism and marijuanas.

No . . . those are trippy man

I see we have another 'shit on anything made by brown people because admitting that it's halfway decent makes you a cuck' thread.

That's cuck talk. You're a cuck.

>nothing is real

Isn't that an oxymoron?

Do you mean the concept of nothing?

can confirm.
source: My parents house.